TL;DR: you can’t even choose a different colour for “return” and “float” in Visual Studio.

I mostly use ​Vim as my everyday editor. This is not the place to go through the details of why, but basically it does exactly what I want. One thing Vim does well for me is syntax highlighting. Here is a bit of Lol Engine C++ using Vim’s default colour scheme:

The colour scheme is simple here:

yellow for control flow

green for types and qualifiers

magenta for constants

light grey for everything else

You may notice that the vec3 or quat types, which are not C++ base types but which behave exactly as if, are coloured just like float. This is simply done by adding the following line to my main config file or to a separate configuration file:

au Syntax cpp syn keyword cType vec2 vec3 vec4 quat

Okay now I would like you to read that again.

yellow for control flow

green for types (including custom types) and qualifiers

I get all that shit by adding one single configuration line

And I am going to show you the pain it is to do the same in Visual Studio.

First Visual Studio attempt: usertype.dat

Since at least Visual Studio 2003, the ​usertype.dat file can be used to add a list of user types. This is still true in Visual Studio 2010. So let’s add those new types to usertype.dat:

vec2
vec3
vec4
quat

Not quite there.

M_PI is not coloured, and if I add it to the list it becomes green instead of magenta, but let’s forget about it for now.

float and const are still yellow and there is no way to fix that! Of course I thought about adding them to the list of user types, but the scanner decides that they’re C++ keywords way before it checks for user types.

Second Visual Studio attempt: a Language Service add-in

Visual Studio add-ins are very powerful. Almost any part of the editor can be modified and augmented. There are ​hundreds of add-ins available and you can write your own.

This looks promising: you can write your own language handler, but you can certainly modify an existing one quite easily (or so I thought).

To handle a new language, you need to subclass the LanguageService class and you register that new class in Visual Studio. One of the methods you need to implement in the language service is GetScanner:

This is brilliant. I mean, with such an architecture, you can implement your own sublanguage, add colour schemes, modify whatever you want. Honestly, this is perfect for my needs.

So here is the plan:

find the LanguageService class responsible for parsing C++

inherit from it and reimplement GetScanner() to use our own IScanner

in our version of ScanTokenAndProvideInfoAboutIt, just call the C++ scanner’s version of ScanTokenAndProvideInfoAboutIt and inspect tokeninfo

if the token info says this is a keyword, match that keyword with our list of types, and change its colour if necessary

register our new language service with a higher priority

This sounds pretty simple and elegant. It’s some kind of two-level ​proxy pattern.

Except it has absolutely no chance to work. Because there is no language service class for C++.

That’s right. Visual Studio does not use its own advertised architecture to handle the C++ language. If you want to slightly change the behaviour of the C++ language service, you need to fully reimplement it. And by fully reimplement, that means fully, even the completion stuff for IntelliSense.

Third Visual Studio attempt: a Classifier add-in

A ​classifier add-in differs from a regular language add-in in that it only affects the text that is being displayed. It has no knowledge of the language syntax or structure or what the underlying parser has analysed, but it does know about what the underlying classifier did. For instance, it doesn't know whether a given chunk of text is a C-style or a C++-style comment, but it does know that it was classified as "comment".

This proved to be the correct thing to use! My Visual Studio colour scheme now looks a lot more like my Vim setup:

There are still limitations, but it's a good start. When another plugin comes in and has higher priority, it undoes everything my add-in did, which is arguably the fault of those other plugins, but I believe the lack of a properly pluggable architecture is definitely the issue.

Further thoughts

I know this is a rant, but I will nonetheless add my own constructive information here, as well as anything readers may wish to contribute.

There are other paths I have not explored yet:

disassemble the Visual Studio DLLs

I am pretty sure people will suggest that I use VAX (​Visual Assist X). I am already using it. I am even a paying customer. In fact I asked for that feature ​more than three years ago and was more or less ignored (the only answer I got was about a minor point where the person thought I was wrong — I wasn’t). While most of the bugs I reported against VAX were fixed, I have a problem with their stance on accessibility, illustrated by their attitude on ​this bug. My general feeling is that VAX is a pathetic, slow and annoying piece of crap. The only reason I do not rant more about it is that I know how painful it is to write Visual Studio extensions.

I asked for advice on ​StackOverflow but since my problem is very specific and probably has no solution, it’s not surprising that I haven’t got any answers yet.

Someone wanted to ​extend the syntax colouring but was told that apparently “this can't be accomplished with an add-in”, “you may be looking at implementing a full language service to provide this feature” and “Todays language services are currently not architected to be extensible”. One suggestion was to replace a whole COM object using only its CLSID.

Another person wanted to ​leverage existing language services from within Visual Studio in order to use it for his own language, and was told it was not possible. The workaround mentioned in that thread involves creating a whole new virtual project that would mirror files, hide them, rename them to .c or .h, and analyse the result.

Conclusion

Honestly, the only reasons I still use Visual Studio are:

I use it at work

a lot of people use it and I need to provide them with a usable environment

there’s no other acceptable way to develop for the Xbox 360

But given how it sucks, and has sucked for years, and made my life miserable, and how some of the bugs I have reported back in 1997 are still present, I can only hope that this pathetic piece of crap either becomes opensource (wishful thinking) or just dies and we get something really extensible instead.